Appellant was previously convicted of eight counts of indecency with a

child, one count of sexual assault of a child, and two counts of aggravated sexual

assault of a child. See Allen v. State, Nos. 01-10-00652-CR et al, 2012 WL

2106550 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] June 7, 2012, pet. ref’d). Punishment

was assessed at 40 years confinement on both counts of aggravated sexual assault

and 20 years confinement on each count of indecency with a child and sexual

assault of a child, with both sentences to run concurrently. See id. Appellant

appealed his convictions and we issued an opinion affirming the convictions on

June 7, 2012. See id. Our mandate issued on February 22, 2013.

On May 20, 2020, relator filed a “motion for leave to file a writ of

mandamus,” arguing that this Court should remand the cases to the trial court for a

“new and fair trial.”

1

We interpret relator’s filings as a petition for writ of

mandamus. On July 7, 2020, relator filed a “Supplement to Writ of Habeas

Corpus,” arguing that the underlying trial court improperly consolidated his trial

and that the prosecutor withheld evidence.

Relator’s mandamus petition and his “Supplement to Writ of Habeas

Corpus” are collateral attacks on a final felony conviction and, therefore, fall

1 The underlying case is The State of Texas v. William Andrew Allen, cause numbers

12976, 12977, 12978, 12979, 12980, 12981, 12982, 12983, 12984, 12985, &

12986, pending in the 155th District Court of Waller County, Texas, the

Honorable Jeff R. Steinhauser presiding.

3

within the scope of a post-conviction writ of habeas corpus under article 11.07 of

the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure. See TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. art. 11.07.

Article 11.07 provides the exclusive means to challenge the conviction. See id.;

Padieu v. Court of Appeals of Tex., Fifth Dist., 392 S.W.3d 115, 117 (Tex. Crim.

App. 2013). Although “the courts of appeals have mandamus jurisdiction in

criminal matters, only the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals has jurisdiction in final

post-conviction felony proceedings.” In re McAfee, 53 S.W.3d 715, 717 (Tex.

App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2001, orig. proceeding); see also In re Briscoe, 230

S.W.3d 196, 196 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2006, orig. proceeding)

(“Article 11.07 contains no role for the courts of appeals.”). Accordingly, we do

not have jurisdiction over relator’s filings.

We dismiss the petition and supplement for want of jurisdiction. We

overrule any pending motions as moot.